Sheltered Workshops

Sheltered workshops have been formally and informally available in the United States for individuals with specific disabilities since early in our nation's history. Traditionally, workshops were considered "sheltered" when the workers, because of their disabilities, needed more support, training, supervision and direction than was otherwise available in the outside work structure. The workers were considered sheltered from the demands of being in a competitive work place and the possible emotional and physical abuses of coworkers and supervisors. Over the past 190 years, the transition from home and school life to a work life has developed significantly, leading to increased opportunities for many disabled individuals to become included rather than segregated from their communities. The changing legal and political environment is described, along with a discussion of the Individual Transition Plan for disabled students aged 14 years and older in the public school system.

Keywords Disabled students; Individual Transition Plan; Job coaching; Postsecondary education; Sheltered workshops; Supported employment; Supported housing; Transition; Sheltered Workshops

Overview: Historical Background of Sheltered Workshops

Traditionally, workshops were considered "sheltered" when the workers, because of their disabilities, needed more support, training, supervision, and direction than was otherwise available in the outside work structure. The workers were considered sheltered from the demands of being in a competitive workplace and the possible emotional and physical abuses of coworkers, supervisors and the public. Examples of the first formal schools with programs that included education plus learning technical skills are the Perkins School for the Blind (then called the New England Asylum for the Blind), established in 1832 in Boston, Massachusetts, by Samuel Gridley Howe, and the American School for the Deaf (then called the Connecticut Asylum for the Education and Instruction of Deaf and Dumb Persons) established by Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet in Hartford, Connecticut in 1817.

World War I saw an increase in Federally-supported rehabilitative services for disabled veterans, especially in regaining some measure of work skills. Between WWI and WWII children with disabilities had the choice to stay at home or to enter an institution for the majority of their lives. Parents were encouraged to send their children who were physically or emotionally disabled to large state residential institutions, which were often labeled "schools." Within these institutions, small industries were developed in on-site sheltered workshops, such as broom-making, knitting, and chair-caning businesses for individuals with blindness. In the journal Outlook for the Blind, articles and editorials early in the century were already discussing issues around employment, including the need for work that addressed different levels of ability (Moore, 2006). The Social Security Act of 1935 and the Randolph -Sheppard Act of 1936 provided major funding for individuals who were disabled, with a special focus on the blind. The Wagner-O'Day Act of 1935 and the Bardon-LaFolle Act of 1943 provided state and federal vocational rehabilitation support, especially to returning WW II soldiers (Moore, 2006). At the same time, parents were pushing for a change in services provided for their children.

The Law Is Changed

The Supreme Court decision in Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954 is best known for its racial desegregation of public schools. However, the decision affected all schools which were segregated, including those schools which served students with disabilities (Hunt & Marshall, 2002). The Supreme Court declared that all children must have an equal opportunity to education, and that this right was guaranteed by the constitution. The struggles and successes for equal education within the Civil Rights movement encouraged parents and advocates of children with disabilities to pursue the right of education for their children within their local, public schools. In 1973, PL 93-112, the Rehabilitation Act, created the Office for the Handicapped, which enabled the present day delivery of state and federal rehabilitation services. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act also impacted special education services through accessible architecture and buildings, prohibiting discrimination for medical services based on disability, and provided a mandate for educational services for students who may not qualify under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), but still have significant difficulty in learning or performing tasks (Hunt & Marshall, 2002).

The deinstitutionalization movement, as exemplified by the Willowbrook State School on Staten Island, New York, fought legally to move residents into the surrounding community. The Willowbrook Consent Decree, signed by Governor Hugh Carey on May 5th, 1975, obligated the State of New York to caring for 6000 Willowbrook residents for the remainder of their lives in the "least restrictive manner." This entailed providing housing, therapeutic and educational programs (Kaser, 2004).

In June, 1975, both houses of Congress passed versions of PL 94-142, (the Education for All Handicapped Children Act) which was signed into law by President Gerald Ford on November 29th, 1975 (NYSED, 2007). This landmark legislation, (later relabeled as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) included the wording "least restrictive environment." This phrase affected decisions by which social, health and educational services are provided, and the level at which they are provided, to this day.

Services and the funding for these services provided in the public schools are dictated by laws passed at the state and federal levels. PL 94-142 provided the mandate and the funding for the development of inclusive services within public education throughout the nation. Among other things, the Individual Education Plan (IEP) was introduced for each student who qualified. Later amendments to PL 94-142 (IDEA) included PL 99-457 (1986), which focused on services and funding for pre-schoolers (3-5 yrs), and provided early intervention for 0-3 year olds with disabilities, under the Handicapped Infants and Toddlers Program. In 1990, PL-101-476 introduced the concept of using "people first" language (i.e., an individual with a disability, rather than 'this paranoid man'), and mandated transition planning (ITP) for all students with disabilities (age 14 - 21). Also passed in 1990, PL 101-336, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which addressed private sector employment, public services, public accommodations, and telecommunications. All of these laws are designed to provide a "free, appropriate, public education to all children" as stated in the Rehabilitation Act and IDEA, with its amendments, and to assist the students in the transition from school to the adult working world (Hunt & Marshall, 2002).

The Idea of Supported Environments

The early sheltered workshops tended to be filled with workers who had higher levels of job-related functioning, and generally, many individuals with disabilities were considered unemployable. Under the Wagner-O'Day Act (1935) "sheltered workshops" were defined as "agencies and industries that employed persons who were blind to produce goods and services," who "functioned outside the competitive labor market" and who had "75% of the direct labor and production jobs performed by blind employees" (Moore, 2006). Wehman & Revell (2005) saw three things that changed the employability of persons with significant developmental disabilities. These were advocacy (be it from parents, teachers, social workers, etc.), concretizing research into practice, and the legal mandates from the above-mentioned laws. Parents wanted their children to go to nearby, neighborhood schools rather than residential or distant schools. The theories brought the idea of supports into the classroom, e.g., rather than send the child away, bring the supports to the child in the local schools. The higher the level of need, the more supports are to be provided. The experience from the classroom was then generalized to the workplace and to housing. The early sheltered workshops had been, in effect, employment in which workers received support in order to accomplish the job tasks, but the new idea was to provide enough support so that workers with disabilities could work in local, competitive employment outside of the sheltered workshops. Again, individuals were not to be sent away somewhere, but were to have the supports brought to them in order to integrate workers into the larger community.

With supported housing individuals are provided the type of supports necessary to live in the community rather than in larger institutions. Examples of supported housing programs are those provided for individuals with disabilities, for individuals transitioning from substance abuse treatment programs, for women having experienced domestic violence, and for the elderly. For the elderly, a tiered service approach for providing supports is generally used. The first level is providing support to the family so that they can support the elder in the home. The second level is sending in-home service professionals to provide direct services. The third is the Assisted Living Facility, where elders have their own apartment or room, but can participate in activities within their house or building, such as eating meals, with others. With all the above levels, an elder could participate in Day Programs provided by a senior center which may include socialization, cognitive stimulation programs, and even volunteer opportunities. It is only with the higher levels of medical and physical care that the elderly might need to enter and live in a Skilled Nursing Facility or nursing home. This tiered approach is an example of the "least restrictive environment" coupled with providing enough supports so that an individual can stay in their familiar and local surroundings.

Within the public school system, special education has a similar tiered approach. A student's IEP determines the level of support and accommodations needed and the resources necessary to implement this plan.

The ITP: Where School & Work Intersect

The 1990 amendment to IDEA, PL 101-476, and the reauthorization of IDEA (1997) mandated the addition of transitional planning for students with disabilities age 14 to 21 years, to prepare them for their lives after the completion of school (Stuart & Smith, 2002). What are the issues that a student may deal with in this transition? Preparing students, or ones' own children, who may not have any significant disabilities or handicaps for this transition actually begins much earlier than their adolescence. Parents might expose a child to various career paths that people are engaged in, might start their child in tasks at home or with neighbors where the children learn a skill, and perhaps get paid a small sum. They might teach a child how to budget the money they do get, and help them make choices between needs and wants. In middle school, children might learn job skills in gardening, housework, childcare, or have a newspaper route. In high school they might learn other skills through volunteering, bagging groceries, working as counselors at summer camps, and getting beginning skills in carpentry, farming, car repair, sewing, sales, fast-food preparation, and office skills. All of these promote self-awareness, create a sense of competency, give students an opportunity to be a part of the community, and teach them job-related behaviors such as being on time, staying focused on the job task, appropriate dress and job etiquette. It also gives students the opportunity to test career paths, and may encourage them to stay in school so that they have more opportunities than service positions or physical labor.

To summarize, in the course of preparing children for their transition into adulthood, ideally, parents begin early to speak about their expectations, notice children's likes, dislikes, strengths and challenges, give them opportunities to practice skills they will need as independent adults, and slowly give them more responsibility for independent employment and living as they get closer to graduating out of high school. This is a scaffolding process, with small increments building on previous learning leading, hopefully, to mastery.

The Individual Transition Plan (ITP) has many of the same emphases. As stated by the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET) (2007):

Transition is based on family values, priorities, and culture, and is focused on an individual youth's interests, preferences, and needs….

…The involvement of youth and families are important so that youth can begin to understand themselves and then identify a team of caring adults who will support their journey. In our culture the primary rite of passage for all youth is graduating from high school. The beginning of adulthood is celebrated at this time with an expectation that youth will develop an increasing independence and autonomy and move on to further education, meaningful jobs, finding their own places to live, and their own friends, companions, and life in the community (Introduction, IEP and Transition Planning p.1).

Ideally, the ITP will prepare the youth for adult life in a way that mirrors the preparation that their non-disabled peers are receiving, but with the extra supports that enable this transition to happen successfully. NCSET cite such things as "raising expectations, being aware of and assessing needs, preferences and interests, building self-awareness, self-identity, self-esteem, and self-determination skills, utilizing the community for supports, socializing and developing long-term relationships, being in activities both at school and in the community, and engaging in leadership and involvement in (their own) transition planning process" (Intro., IEP & TP, p.1).

In short, it is the same preparation that their peers need for post-high school transition. The difference, perhaps, is that if their peers do not get these supports in high school, they may be able to reach for them on their own, whereas the students with disabilities may not be successful in their transition without the support.

The post-high school opportunities available for students with disabilities are similar to those students without disabilities: employment at an entry level, further education at a college or university or technical school, or some combination of the two. Living arrangements may be at home, on-campus or in the community. If a disabled student does not enter either employment or further education, he or she could engage in service or volunteer work which might lead to employment or career paths. For students without significant disabilities, supports such as physical accommodations, organizational strategies, and job coaching can be enough for them to enter and retain competitive or "open" employment in the community. Self-employment, whether as artists or musicians, or businesses such as concession stands, paper routes or owning candy machines, can also be a career path if there is enough support and mentoring.

For individuals with significant disabilities the choices include more highly structured programs: specifically, supported employment in the community, with a job coach or peer job partner, day programs and sheltered workshops. Even though there have been some sheltered workshops early in the 19th and 20th centuries i.e., the workshop at the Perkins School for the Blind (Brooks, Mann, & Phillips, 1833), the workshops connected with Goodwill Industries (Friedman, 1940), the workshop of the Michigan Commission for the Blind started in Saginaw, MI in 1903 (State of Michigan, 2007), the sheltered workshop became more common in the 1970s and 1980s, as funding became available, based on the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. Examples of these are the workshops in Missouri, which started with one workshop in St. Louis in 1965, and now have 93 workshops statewide, employing 7,500 workers with disabilities (MASWM, 2007); Hetlinger Developmental Center and Sheltered Workshop in Kansas, which began in 1961 with 5 students, and in 2006 grossed $125,416 from their sub-contracting work, with a consumer payroll of $91,613. (Hetlinger, 2007); Woodland Industries in Houston County, MN which began with 7 individuals in 1980 and grew to 76 individuals in 1996 (ABC Woodland Industries, 2007); and the Gateway Industries workshop in West Virginia which began in 1980 and last year employed 45 individuals with $470,000 paid in wages (Gateway Industries, 2007).

Examples of work performed in sheltered workshops include: manufacturing, assembly, sorting, packing, woodwork, sewing, recycling, shrink-wrapping, and a wide variety of other jobs. Some programs are farming enterprises, such as L'Arche in Tacoma Washington, and Left Foot Organics in Lewis County, Washington. Other programs include outside contracts for jobs such as landscaping or janitorial services, where a supported crew goes into the community to provide the services.

Viewpoints

In the latter half of the 1990s and to the present day, there are disagreements as to the efficacy of sheltered workshops. In 1996, for example, proposed Senate Bill 40 and House Bill 1415 in Missouri allowed and encouraged non-disabled workers to work in the sheltered workshops, while placing workers with disabilities into part-time supported and integrated employment in the communities (MRCoMO, 2007). These proposed bills brought a lot of response from parents of workshop attendees, arguing that a 15-hour "poorly supervised" community employment position is a bad tradeoff to a 40-hour structured environment which did not have the stress of competition, was a place where peers could socialize, and where the parents could be sure that their sons and daughters would not be abused by managers or other workers because of low or slow functioning. Steven J. Taylor (2002) argued that sheltered workshops should be phased out of existence because of their low pay, that they are not a transitional step into integrated or competitive employment, and that the most significantly disabled individuals were not served by sheltered workshops, because "these people are deemed unproductive and unlikely to help them fulfill their contract work" (Taylor, 2002, p.2). He reports (without citing) that "study after study has shown that people with severe disabilities can thrive in regular employment, given the proper supports" (Taylor, 2002, p. 2).

In more controlled studies, Kober & Eggleton (2005) reported quality of life measures in individuals placed in open employment. When taken as a single group, the results showed statistically significant higher quality of life scores. When the experimental group was split based on the workers' functional work ability, the results showed that those with high functioning work ability reported higher quality of life, whereas the low functioning work ability showed no difference between open employment and the sheltered workshop. Gillmore, Schuster, Timmons & Butterworth (2000) showed similar results and differentiation in their ten-year analysis of individuals receiving services from State vocational rehabilitation services. The results showed that there were fewer people placed in shelter workshops, and that there is an increased incidence of competitive and sheltered employment, but a decrease in real earnings. They report that "supported employment has grown and evolved as the most effective employment strategy for people with disabilities" (Gillmore, et al., 2000, p. 32) and see supported employment as a "great improvement over segregated, sheltered workshops" (p. 32). Further, "individuals who participate in supported employment programs generally have substantial greater earnings that their counterparts" (p. 32) in workshops. However, they also found that those individuals who had severe disabilities accounted for less than 20% of the workers who were receiving supported employment. Also, the study cited Mank, Cioffi and Yovanoff (1997), who found that "individuals with more severe disabilities who do receive supported employment services do not have as positive an outcome as individuals with less severe disabilities" (Gillmore, et al., 2000, p. 33). These results suggest that while integrated, supported, open and competitive employment increases the quality of life for workers with disabilities and higher job functioning, those with severe disabilities may continue needing a structured, secure day-program type of sheltered workshop as a necessary resource, as suggested by the parents in Missouri.

Conclusion

The passage of P.L. 94-142 in 1975, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that all children with disabilities from ages 3 years through 21 years be provided a free, public, appropriate, public education in the least restrictive environment. Each child is to have an Individual Education Plan (IEP) to meet their specific needs and to identify the resources that they need. From age 14 years, they are also to have an Individual Transition Plan (ITP) to prepare them for their post-high school lives. This may include further education and/or job training and preparation for employment. While many children benefit from supported employment in the community, those children with the most severe disabilities can also thrive in the structure and environment of the sheltered workshop.

Terms & Concepts

Accommodations: Physical, emotional, or systems supports, which enable an individual with a disability to perform life, job or educational tasks, such as a speaking computer screen for those with limited vision.

Deinstitutionalization: The movement which legally set the standard for "least restrictive environment," originally moving individuals with developmental disabilities from large state institutions into smaller group homes in the community.

Inclusive Education: The process that integrates students with disabilities into the regular public school classrooms

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): The name given in 1990 to Public Law 94-142, originally known as Education for All Handicapped Children Act.

Individual Education Plan: The written education plan mandated by PL 94-142 for all students with disabilities from ages 3 -18 years.

Individual Transition Plan: The written plan for transition from high school to adult life, which is part of a student's IEP, ages 14 -21 years.

Job Coach: An individual job trainer who assists individuals with disabilities learns their job tasks, works with their on-site supervisors, and assists with integration into the job placement.

Least Restrictive Environment: A legal term which mandates that education, housing, and therapeutic treatment facilities all be provided at the lowest level of restriction and the highest level of integration for individuals with disabilities.

Sheltered Workshops: Facilities which enable workers with disability to learn and perform job tasks with a maximum amount of support. Usually contracted assembly-line work or as service providers (janitorial, etc).

Supported Employment: Employment, where a job coach assists a worker to learn the job tasks, and where a supportive structure is set up to help the worker retain employment.

Supported Housing: Housing, which includes case management and/or on-site personnel, which provide enough multi-faceted resources to enable an individual to live in the community rather than in a larger institution.

Bibliography

Ability Building Center Woodland Industries (2007). Woodland Industries History. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.woodlandind.org/about/history.php

Brooks, E., Mann, H., & Phillips, S. C. (1833). Address of the trustees of the New England Institution for the Education of the Blind to the public. Perkins School for the Blind archives. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.disabilitymuseum.org/lib/docs/1926.htm

Cimera, R., Wehman, P., West, M., & Burgess, S. (2012). Do sheltered workshops enhance employment outcomes for adults with autism spectrum disorder?. Autism: The International Journal of Research & Practice, 16, 87-94. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=71865684&site=ehost-live

Cimera, R. (2011). Does being in sheltered workshops improve the employment outcomes of supported employees with intellectual disabilities?. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 35, 21-27. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=70936317&site=ehost-live

Freidman, O. A. (1940). Review of situation of Goodwill Industries in connection With Fair Labor Standards Act. The Goodwill Bulletin, Goodwill Ind. Int'l archives. R. E. Watkins Library. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.disabilitymuseum.org/lib/docs/1987.htm

Gateway Industries, Inc. (2007). Gateway Industries, Inc. Purpose and history. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.gatewayind.com/Purpose.cfm

Gilmore, D. S., Schuster, J. L., Timmon, S. J., & Butterworth, J. (2000). An analysis of trends for people with M.R., C.P., and epilepsy receiving services from State VR agencies: Ten years of progress. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 44, 1, 30-38. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=3678736&site=ehost-live

Hetlinger Developmental Services (2007). History of Hetlinger. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.emporia.com/hetlinger/page5.html

Hunt, N. & Marshall, K. (2002). Exceptional Children and Youth, 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Kaser, J. (2004). A guide to Willowbrook State School resources at other institutions. Archives and Special Collections, CSI Library, CUNY. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/archives/WillowbrookRG/htm

Kober, R. & Eggleton, I.R.C. (2005). The effect of different types of employment on quality of life. Journal of Intellectual Disability, 49, 10, 756-760. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17993804&site=ehost-live

Mank, D., Cioffi, A., & Yovanoff, P. (1997) An analysis of the typicalness of supported Employment jobs, natural supports, and wage and integration outcomes. Mental Retardation, 35, 185-197.

McArthur, R.C. (2005). Faculty-based advising: An important factor in community college retention. Community College Review, 32, 4, 1-19. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=6298018&site=ehost-live

Mentally Retarded Citizens of Missouri, Inc (2007). What is a Sheltered Workshop? Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.rcomo.org/whatisasw.htm

Michigan, State of (2007). Brief history of services for the blind in Michigan, 1903- to present. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.michigan.gov/

Missouri Association of Sheltered Workshop Managers (MASWM) (2007).Workshops: Where did they begin? Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.moworkshops.org/latestfolder/WhereDidTheyBegin.html

Moore, J.E. (2006). 100-year review of trends and issues in employment, rehabilitation and legislation. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 100, 8, 453- 458. Retrieved 15 Feb 2007, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=22415389&site=ehost-live

National Center for Secondary Education and Transition (2007). IEP and Transition Planning. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.ncset.org/topics/ieptransition/

New York State Education Department (2007). State-federal education policy, historical essay: The Ford years. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.archives.nysed.gov/edpolicies/research/essay_Ford

Sherman, M. W. (2013). Oregon to keep students out of sheltered workshops. Education Daily, 46, 3. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=87570314&site=ehost-live

Stuart, C.H. & Smith, S.W. (2002). Transitional planning for students with severe Disabilities: Policy implications for the classroom. Intervention In School and Clinic, 37, 4, 234-236. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=6298018&site=ehost-live

Taylor, S.J. (2002) Disabled workers deserve real choices, real jobs. The Center for An Accessible Society. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from http://www.accessiblesociety.org/topics/economicsemployment/shleteredwksps.html

Wehman, P. & Revell, G. (2005). Lessons learned from the provision and funding of Employment services for the MR/DD population. Journal of Disability Policy Studies 16, 2, 84-101. Retrieved February 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17993804&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

The Arc (2007) The Individuals with disabilities Education Act: Transition from school to work and community life: ques & ans. Retrieved from http://www.thearc.org

Virginia Department of Education (2003) Collaborative transition Initiatives. Retrieved from http://www.penk12.va.us/VDOE/sped/transition/

Capella-McDonnall, M.E. (2005). Predictors of Competitive employment for blind and visually impaired consumers of vocational rehabilitation services. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 99, 5, 303-315. Kinnison. L.R., Fuson, S., & Cates, D. (2005). Rural transition: what are the limitations? Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24, 3, 30-33. Retrieved from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=18378583&site=ehost-live